Application of the Frye Standard to Medical Expert Testimony

New York state courts apply the standard set forth in Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923), to determine the admissibility of 'novel scientific evidence.' People v. Wesley, 83 N.Y.2d 417, 422 (1994). In People v. Wernick, 89 N.Y.2d 111, 117 (1996), the state's highest court, the Court of Appeals, held that the Frye test applies 'in all instances when a party seeks to present novel scientific or … medical evidence.' (Emphasis added.) Specifically, the court held that a defendant's attempt to offer expert testimony in 'an attempt to establish a 'pattern,' 'profile,' 'theory' or 'syndrome' to show certain characteristics of women who kill their newborns immediately after birth was subject to the Frye standard. The Court of Appeals affirmed the exclusion of that 'novel hypothesis' because that theory was 'not generally recognized in the relevant medical context and community.' Id. at 115.

The Frye standard is implicated when plaintiffs in product liability, medical malpractice, or other tort cases offer expert medical testimony to establish that a medication was the proximate cause of injuries sustained by the plaintiff. Plaintiffs generally must prove medical causation through the use of expert testimony because that is not a subject within the ordinary understanding of lay jurors. New York courts have applied Frye under such circumstances.